Larry Catá Backer's comments on current issues in transnational law and policy. These essays focus on the constitution of regulatory communities (political, economic, and religious) as they manage their constituencies and the conflicts between them. The context is globalization. This is an academic field-free zone: expect to travel "without documents" through the sometimes strongly guarded boundaries of international relations, constitutional, international, comparative, and corporate law.

The Zhiwei Tong (童之伟) Series focuses on translating some of
Professor Tong's work on issues of criminal law and justice in China, matters
that touch on core constitutional issues. Each of the posting will
include an English translation from the original Chinese, the Chinese original
and a link to the original essay site. Many of the essays will include
annotations that may also be of interest. I hope those of you who are
interested in Chinese legal issues will find these materials, hard to get in
English, of use. I am grateful to my research assistants, YiYang Cao and Zhichao Yi for
their able work in translating these essays.

I have paid attention to the discussion on the ban on begging for some time now. I recently read the Dalian municipal government’s development of regulations that would create the “the first city ban on begging,” prohibiting in many public places the coverage of begging. I could not help but want to talk about my points of view.

Begging is an ancient social phenomena and it is undoubtedly difficult to eliminate for virtually any of today’s societies. Even within the wealthy and powerful, such as within New York City, there are no public spaces that don’t have beggars panhandling. However, the beggars there are polite and do not adversely affect the rights and freedoms of others. Similarly, in these countries, people usually only hear discussion of how to best address homelessness and other social issues and cannot hear someone accuse beggars of having an adverse impact upon a city’s appearance and the talk of having it be prohibited.

China is a developing country and it is normal for some people to live a life as a beggar. Therefore, regardless of the context, to forbid begging in our country seems to be an overly extravagant pursuit. To solve this kind of problem, people should not be too vain and should not judge people according to their socioeconomic status. Chinese law is not exclusive and dedicated to the upper strata of society, but is also the law for beggars. China’s law should not only reflect the will and interests of the upper strata of society and should also reflect the will and interests of beggars and others in the bottom of society. I can in no way imagine how the area that would have a ban on begging would exclude any person that looks like a beggar from entering and would not allow individuals to stretch out their hands to beg. Regardless of the situation, these rules would constitute a restriction on citizens’ personal freedom. Law does not allow for the inhibition of freedom and such rules and regulations set by the local government lack sufficient legal basis. And in accordance with the legislation law, no administrative organ has the authority to set these kinds of rules and regulations.

Of course, the behavior of some of the individuals begging has been quite vile and should be prohibited and I do not have any objection. These vile actions including blocking and chasing after pedestrians and passenger cars, pulling clothes and grabbing legs, chasing and badgering incessantly, taking forcefully and ferociously demanding, manipulate and use children for profit, lying and committing fraud to gain sympathy, and obtaining through deception, etc. is difficult to classify as begging. These kinds of behaviors by beggars are acts of infringement upon the rights and freedoms of others, and should be punished as a matter of course.

However, the law is meant to regulate people’s behavior; normative legal documents should be used to ban begging within a geographic scope and should not be used to ban the act of begging itself, but should be targeted against a specific number of begging practices, such as blocking and chasing after pedestrians and passenger cars, pulling clothes and grabbing legs, chasing and badgering incessantly, taking forcefully and ferociously demanding, manipulate and use children for profit, lying and committing fraud to gain sympathy, and obtaining through deception and other acts of begging that impedes or violates the rights and freedoms of others. In this regard, existing rules and regulations are enough.

For a long time, people have focused their attention on the standardization of begging behavior on the establishment of areas where begging is banned. This routine not only has no legal basis, but cannot really solve the social issues and can only lead to trouble elsewhere.

I think that decision-makers should change their line of reasoning and endeavor to standardize the begging behavior of beggars by using legitimate and civilized ways to eliminate from begging certain undesirable social phenomenon, form a certain level of societal tolerance for begging and ensure that it does not interfere with the rights and freedoms of others.

Search This Blog

Translate

ORCID

ORCHID QR Code

ACI

A Top 100 Blog--Online Schools.org

Follow by Email

PRINTING INDIVIDUAL POSTS

Individual postings may now be more easily printed. To print, FIRST, click on the title of the essay you want to print, THEN scroll down to the "Labels" line near the end of the essay and CLICK on "print this article."

Subscribe To

Cluster Maps

Wikio

Copyright; Citation and Attribution:

All essays are (c) Larry Catá Backer except where otherwise noted. All rights reserved. The essays may be cited and quoted with appropriate reference. Suggested reference as follows: Larry Catá Backer, [Essay Title], Law at the End of the Day, ([Essay Posting Date]) available at [http address].

The author holds a faculty appointment at Pennsylvania State University. Notice is hereby given that irrespective of that appointment, this blog serves as a purely personal enterprise created to serve as an independent site focusing on issues of general concern to the public. The views and opinions expressed here are those of its author. This site is neither affiliated with nor does it in any way state, reflect, or represent the views of Pennsylvania State University or any of its entities, units or affiliates.

Ravitch and Backer's Law and Religion: Cases, Materials, and Readings

3rd Edition 2015

Broekman and Backer, Signs in Law

Springer 2014

BACKERINLAW--PERSONAL WEBSITE

Here you can find my published work, manuscripts, presentations, and more!

Globalization Law and Policy Series from Ashgate Publishing

Globalization: Law and Policy will include an integrated bodyof scholarship that critically addresses key issues and theoretical debates in comparative and transnational law. Volumes in the series will focus on the consequential effects of globalization, including emerging frameworks and processes for the internationalization, legal harmonization, juridification and democratization of law among increasingly connected political, economic, religious, cultural, ethnic and other functionally differentiated governance communities. This series is intended as a resource for scholars, students, policy makers and civil society actors, and will include a balance of theoretical and policy studies in single-authored volumes and collections of original essays.

An interview with the Series EditorQueries and book proposals may be directed to:Larry Catá BackerW. Richard and Mary Eshelman Faculty Scholarand Professor of Law, Professor of International AffairsPennsylvania State University239 Lewis Katz BuildingUniversity Park, PA 16802email: lcb911@gmail.com

About Me

I hope you enjoy these essays. Each treats aspects of the relationship between law, broadly understood, and human organization. My essays are about government and governance, based on the following assumptions: Humans organize themselves in all sorts of ways. We bind ourselves to organization by all sorts of instruments. Law has been deployed to elaborate differences between economic organizations (principally corporations, partnerships and other entities), political organization (the state, supra-national, international, and non-governmental organizations), religious, ethnic and family organization. I am not convinced that these separations, now sometimes blindly embraced, are particularly useful. This skepticism serves as the foundation of the essays here. My thanks to Arianna Backer for research assistance.